Gratuitous Gun Pic: MAC 1911 JSOC (.45 ACP)

Evil Reader John C. sent me a link to the 1,000-round test of this lovely budget 1911:

Okay, it’s a 1911 so I’m going to like it, and it comes with all sorts of standard stuff like a titanium trigger, ambi-safety, adjustable rear sight and (yes!) a brass bead front sight.  My only quibble is this unnecessary protuberance on the grip safety…
…but I’ve griped about it often enough so I won’t repeat it here.

Most of all, I like the price point (around $750 street) which, considering the effects of Bidenflation (don’t get me started) is quite acceptable.

And the tester likes it fine, but they always do, don’t they?  Certainly, though, the MAC came through the 1,000-round test without any major issues, which is more than you can say about a lot of the budget guns on the market nowadays.

And it looks like a proper 1911, none of that front-of-slide serration nonsense that all the cool kids seem to demand.


  1. nice looking pistol. I like that extra bump on the grip safety. There’s one on my SW1911 and I haven’t had a problem with it as long as I kept it lubricated. I prefer the fixed rear sights like Novak instead of the adjustable ones on a carry gun. I haven’t tried the ambidextrous safety yet but they sure do look appealing. For $750 it appears that you get quite a lot on that firearm. I’m sure it has MIM parts but just replace those as they break. The MIM parts on my S&W haven’t broken yet.

  2. Hoo boy, I am sorely tempted to try to find one of these. I have three 1911s and one 2011, so I need one like a hole in the head, but the web forum I’ve followed as long as Kim’s blogs is, I remember reading about the MEU(SOC) pistols being built by Marine Corps armorers at Quantico back in the day. This eventually resulted in the Marines ordering a little over 4,000 the Colt M45A1 pistol in 2012.

    Article link here:

    From my reading, Tisas is about on a par with Springfield Armory on QC, fit and finish, but I don’t think Tisas uses any MIM parts. I’m not one that worries about that sort of thing, but a quality 1911, with all steel parts, at this price point, and LOOKING LIKE THAT *drool* — I may not be able to hold out.

    I also like fixed sights, but none of my current versions have adjustable, and I’d like this exactly as set up.

  3. Oh, about that bump on the grip safety. Some shooters hand shape and grip does not always depress the grip safety enough, which is, obviously, a prolem. I’ve not had that issue, but it is common enough that almost all grip safeties today sport that bump. The Quantico built guns did not have them, the Colt M45A1 did.

    The grip safety is superfluous, and not really required for safe operation, in fact, my 2022 does not even have a grip safety, and Novak build guns without them, as well, using a proprietary backstrap he calls “The Answer”. Back in the early days of IPSC, before they started putting bumps on grip safeties, many competitors pinned their safety. I’ve done this on my Retro build using a small slice off a Wilson Combat Shok-Buff. You remove the MSH retaining spring, slide the MSH down a bit, depress the grip safety, put the little slice of Shok-Buff on top of the MSH behind the hammer strut, then push the MSH up and reinstall the retaining pin.

    This practice fell out of favor when the bumps started appearing because the problem went away. But my GI-style grip safety (no beaver tail) on the Retro is pinned. This is perfectly safe, as the safety is very positive.

    Anyway, I agree, it is not very attractive, but it is functional.

  4. The 2022 in the above should have read 2011. No grip safety at all, but all 1911 controls, chambered in 9mm.

    I think I can resist this gun purchase impulse because I’m hankering for a Russian or Warsaw Pact SKS. If I can avoid looking at it, I should be OK.

    More totties, please, to distract me, sir!


Comments are closed.